“It was drizzling and mysterious at the beginning of our journey.” —On The Road by Jack Kerouac
So begins Douglas Clegg's "Halloween Man," as a young boy is kidnapped from a south Texas trailer park at gunpoint by a leatherclad man and driven away in the rain. This incredibly tense and scary scene is followed by something like this:
"You Satan?" the kid asks his assailant.
"Could be," is the reply.
"You in a bad mood or something?"
"Kid, I'm always in a bad mood."
"Your car is a shitkicker, mister."
"Say, kid, you don't mind that some stranger put you in his car and is driving you someplace you have no idea of?"
"You're the one with the gun, not me, Boss."
This is no ordinary 12-year-old. Evidently, he has messianic powers to raise the dead and heal the sick. He and his kidnapper are on the road to the New England town of Stonehaven to confront an ancient evil, and the name of this highway is Damnation.
While horror cinema in the 90s largely consisted of a meta slasher resurgence after the success of "Scream," horror literature was still innovating and pushing boundaries. I'd say "The Halloween Man" falls squarely in that tradition, but it has not left a mark on the collective zeitgeist as some of its 90s contemporaries.
I've been told that Douglas Clegg's style could be one of the reasons, as he can be a little challenging at times. This is the first novel of his that I've read, and I think I now understand what people mean when they say this. The story does not follow a linear progression, and there are frequent extended flashbacks, sometimes flashbacks within flashbacks. Scenes transition so that you are not immediately sure if we are now in the present or the past. Diary entries and book excerpts are mixed into the main timeline. Side stories are told from various points of view. Multiple characters are introduced, and then we don't see them again for just long enough that we've forgotten who they were when they factor into the story again. We get hints about the true nature of our characters or about what happened in a particular scene that are often misleading. The language becomes purposefully vague to obscure what happens in key moments.
Clegg was clearly influenced by late 19th/early 20th Century writers. I find this to be overall a good thing, as it weaves a puzzle for the reader to unwind, but I can definitely understand where many may grow frustrated with his narrative choices. This is not a writer that holds your hand for the duration of the journey. In fact, he tends to purposefully lead you into dark places and then leave you stranded to find your own way.
My main complaint is that he does tend to get stuck in loops. While he'll skim over important plot developments or be stubbornly ambiguous about others, he'll also drive a point home until you grow nauseated. We get repetitive scene after scene of descriptions about how one character feels. Yes, the main character wants to get out of the small podunk town he grew up in. We get it. Yes, he and his girlfriend are ambivalent about having a baby. We get it already. Yes, the bad people in this book are really bad people. Can we move on with the story?
This seems to particularly be the case when it comes to how Clegg depicts carnal relationships. OK, she's got a nice rack. Yes, we know he wants to get her in bed--you don't need to tell us in multiple obscene ways. No, no, you're back to talking about her chest again, Douglas, we're past that now. Oh, now your talking about her lips--well that's different at least. OK, you're back to her breasts again. Do you need some time alone, dude?
All of the buggery has a purpose, because you're supposed to see the difference between lust and love, and how evil thoughts invite evil into your soul. But again, Clegg doesn't seem to know when to quit, while at the same time, he lets the reader formulate their own conclusions about so many other things. He runs when he should walk, and then comes to a complete stop when he should run.
Still, I think I understood and appreciated what he was trying to do. And for the most part, the author has a lot of interesting things to say. This is a particularly thought-provoking study of the nature of evil. Does evil come from Satan or from a God that encompasses the whole spectrum of goodness and badness? What does this evil look like if it also comes from God? Does this explain why God has not eradicated evil if God is all good? What's the significance of death and resurrection in various cultures? What exactly was the relationship between Judas and Jesus? How has the oral tradition changed our understanding of ancient knowledge and wisdom about good vs evil over the millennia? Why so many similarities in the varieties of religious experience throughout the centuries? Those of you into religious studies, theology, and philosophy might have a deeper experience with this book than those without such a background, but anyone can pick up on these ideas and run wild.
At this point, you're probably wondering why this book is called "The Halloween Man." Well, that's part of the overall puzzle, you see. You can use the questions I have posed above to guide you in getting to the meat of this highly philosophical title for yourself, but to say any more would be to enter spoilers. This is not necessarily a trick-or-treating, jack-o'-lantern, ghost-and-goblin, leaves-a-falling holiday celebration. It's a dark and brutal questioning of how much we really know about our respective religious beliefs.
In conclusion, this book won't be for everyone. But there's a lot for the careful reader to appreciate, and more than enough gore, eerie atmosphere, suspense, quirky humor, and overall fun mayhem for fans of thrillers and horrors.
Therefore, I give this novel 3.5 stars out of five, rounded to 4. I'm definitely interested in exploring more from Douglas Clegg.